there are 4 CNC machines in the shop that I use. 1 uses a Fanuc controller which is an industrial control, 2 use DOS, and the newest one uses Win 2k. I would not want to stick any body parts within the working envelope on a CNC that ran Win95, as it crashes too much. (and yes, you do need to stick your hands within the working envelope often to remove parts and change some tools) The Fanuc is so old, that it uses the tape metaphor for memory. i.e. memory is expressed in terms of length of tape, talk about creaky.
Actually the PowerCenter Pro has a 60MHz bus. I'm overclocking the processor by 20MHz to get an even multiple (7x) to coax a little more performance out of it. It is actually a 400MHz processor. I'm using Fast/Wide SCSI as well. I do believe the eye candy (most of which is turned off) in OS X makes it seem slower that YDL 3.0 which what I'm using on the Beige G3. It just seems "snappier" but I haven't run benchmarks to quanify the speed.
I tried and tried to get OS X on my particular beige G3. I was never able to get it to load. I even got a newer ROM module for it. It runs YDL very snappy. As for one's 70yo In-laws, I wouldn't give them linux unless they really wanted it. And yes, I certainly know that speed is relative. My fastest machine is the aforementioned 420Mhz powermac clone. It dates from 1997. I'm looking forward to getting a mini, it would be my first new mac. I used second hand equipment almost exclusively, it is alot cheaper that way.
I didn't know there was a distro for the 68000 16Mhz Mac Portable. How does it connect to the internet? 9600 baud?
Just joking, I assume you're using a Powerbook
or ibook.
Of course, Old world macs aren't firewire bootable either. But YDL is very fast on old world macs compared to OS X via Xpostfacto on old world hardware. (which is still good if not aged hardware) I'm currently running OS X on a G3 upgraded Powercomputing clone (thanks to Xpostfacto). at 420Mhz, it is slow compared to YDL on a Beige G3 266. So it is either OS 9 or YDL on old hardware. It is getting harder to get modern web browser features on OS 9.
I would agree that it is not a solution. I myself will not patronize the iTunes music store. I want to use an open standard and MP3 is one that I am happy with. and I do love my ipod
ok, now I understand that there is AAC, and AAC with fairplay (or should it be called fareplay? snicker snicker) AAC is by no means proprietary, but hardware player manufacturers would have to licence it. Fairplay is prorietary, but I understand that one can bypass it thru CD to MP3 or whatever other codec you want to use. Whether that is legal, is another issue. But I do belive you can put fairplay protected music on other players, you just have to work around it with tools that are available within OS X (i.e. burn a cd and re-encode, or convert to AIFF and re-encode) These tools may not be obvious, but I have seen on the net, people being able to do just that, without getting additional software. Of course it is an inconvience.
I was under the impression that AAC is not proprietary to apple. I thougt that they have licenced it, to provide some DRM in response to the RIAA. I do not believe that no one is stopping other hardware music players (MP3 players to be incorrect about the generic name) from adopting AAC other than licencing fees. Apple was pressured to provide DRM, and they decided on AAC which I believe others can use. So I don't think it is fair to criticize apple for thier choice of DRM for the itunes music store. and no, apple is not the new microsoft, as they do not have a monopoly, unless you consider that they do have a monopoly on cool computer hardware. I did do some googling before this post, but I use MP3 so I really haven't been following the music format choices. I don't use the iTunes music store. I do know that iTunes (not the store) does support other players when it comes to MP3 formats. And, since you can burn CD from AAC music in itunes, you can work around it to provide the music to other hardware players. (there are work arounds such that you don't actually have to burn a CD to convert it to MP3)
Wow, with so many countries producing nukes, I thinks the biggest threat is extra warheads being made with out the critical elements (the plutonium or enriched uranium) and these warhead "kits" getting loose. all it would take is plutonium made to critical dimensions, some HMX, maybe some RDX, and you have a nuke.
Now, I love hp calcs. But as the inventor of the "pocket" scientific calcualtors, they never stopped to make inexpensive RPN calcs, or solar powered calcs. (inexpensive being less that $20) Granted, an hp could last you the rest of your life, but you can't find some "N" cells for it at your local convience store. How come I never got the solar powered RPN calulator? I'd pay more than $20 for it. Could you make it with non-volitile memory? The hard core graphing calc is going away, replaced by computers and PDA's. Long live HP calculators.
Ok, look that was originally a Service/Deorbit module. Service. That might be a useful goal. We can develop autonamous docking, advance robotics, maybe make a "space tugboat" with it and service other satellites. But I think the bean counters, could counter that satellites should be made disposible and let's not waste our time and money on manned missions to service satellites. However, Hubble should be a historical monument.
Maybe I should write a proposal on a study to bring down hubble using software routines that uses its solar panels, magnetic torquers, reaction wheels, gravity, and some atmospheric drag to bring it down in a somewhat predictible and safe manner maybe over a period of several hundred orbits...
My point is, people bid on a lot of things...
It seems the cheapest way would be send a shuttle to nudge it during a mission whose orbit could be coordinated with hubble's orbit at one point during a mission that isn't specifically hubble related. They could use the arm and the shuttle's manuvering thrusters and significantly alter its orbit. I assume all future shuttle missions will be ISS and maybe DoD related, in order to conserve a "precious resource" that is the Shuttle's remaining flying schedule. I'm guessing that hubble's orbit is more elliptical than ISS and in a higher overall orbit. Therefore, it would be difficult to coordinate a mission? Since they can't get more that 2 people on ISS at once!!??? Man, my old man worked on apollo, skylab, hubble, ISS and problably a few more. Apollo was great in every sense of the word. when I was a kid, telling people your dad worked on hubble, with its misshapen mirror, you would be teased. ISS was a death of a thousand cuts, with poorly defined mission(s), I believe it was a very politcal project (ISS) that left science at #2 on the priorities list. (Apollo was political at its formation, but there was good science getting us to the moon (and maybe make our missiles hit their targets better in the process)). It is National Aeronautics and Space Administration isn't it? Kinda vague... Sounds ambitious... Administration
on Hubble there are reaction wheels and magnetic torquers. there are no thrusters. Hubble can manage its orbit with the reaction wheels and magnetic torquers which interact with the Earth's magnetic field.
They cannot provide a large amount of force but like pushing a swing, a little push here and a little push there... Maybe use some atmospheric drag here and there...
I would think that NASA would try to save money on hardware and try some orbital mechanics to bring it down without developing a "deorbit module" Kinda like Skylab. (ok Skylab had some thrusters, but it also had control moment gyros)
I read the referenced article, no mention of a seperate "deorbit module" Some googling pointed to a proposed "deorbit module" that may cost up to $1bn. I think they will look long and hard at orbital mechanics to bring it down without the expense of a "deorbit module" but hey, I don't work for NASA. Hey, let's give lockmart some more tax money. Yes, I should talk to my father more!
the idea is to bring it down while they still have "robotic" control. There is no robot to send up to bring it down. They want to be able to command it down, in a nice target path, not some crapshoot deorbit when it goes bad and they can no longer control it due to gyroscope failure. BTW my father worked on pointing and control on Hubble. I'm no expert, but I've spent many nights asking him a lot of questions about Hubble.
More defense funded research. Fuck that. That is why I quit working for Auburn. Most of the research I was involved in was DoD funded. After the iraq war started I couldn't continue to do research funded by the DoD. A friend of mine did fuel cell research at Auburn. I hope he doesn't have any conflicts. There is nothing worse than seeing your work perverted into being used for an offensive war that was not needed.
Fuck the DoD!!
money (in the U.S.) has no intrinsic value. If Bush runs the country like the companies he has run, your money may be worthless. What happens if the gov't goes bankrupt? Can I get insurance insurance?? you know, in case my insurance company goes bankrupt.
The AP plant in Nevade did explode. With shock waves no less. They were still cranking out AP for NASA after the Challenger accident (due to contractual obligations). They had a huge stockpile.
There is nothing wrong with putting water on magnesium powder as long as said magnesium powder isn't burning at the time you hose it down. If it is burning, don't put water on it.
Very pure aluminum (3000 series I think) is used for storage tanks. The aluminum forms a self repairing oxide layer. Organics are a no-no around powerful oxidizers.
Slashdot Mirror
there are 4 CNC machines in the shop that I use. 1 uses a Fanuc controller which is an industrial control, 2 use DOS, and the newest one uses Win 2k. I would not want to stick any body parts within the working envelope on a CNC that ran Win95, as it crashes too much. (and yes, you do need to stick your hands within the working envelope often to remove parts and change some tools) The Fanuc is so old, that it uses the tape metaphor for memory. i.e. memory is expressed in terms of length of tape, talk about creaky.
4 cpu mac. Call it the Quadra.
Actually the PowerCenter Pro has a 60MHz bus. I'm overclocking the processor by 20MHz to get an even multiple (7x) to coax a little more performance out of it. It is actually a 400MHz processor. I'm using Fast/Wide SCSI as well. I do believe the eye candy (most of which is turned off) in OS X makes it seem slower that YDL 3.0 which what I'm using on the Beige G3. It just seems "snappier" but I haven't run benchmarks to quanify the speed.
I don't know. Last time I used iCab, it would "expire" after awhile. It was annoying. Otherwise I like it as a browser.
I tried and tried to get OS X on my particular beige G3. I was never able to get it to load. I even got a newer ROM module for it. It runs YDL very snappy. As for one's 70yo In-laws, I wouldn't give them linux unless they really wanted it. And yes, I certainly know that speed is relative. My fastest machine is the aforementioned 420Mhz powermac clone. It dates from 1997. I'm looking forward to getting a mini, it would be my first new mac. I used second hand equipment almost exclusively, it is alot cheaper that way.
I didn't know there was a distro for the 68000 16Mhz Mac Portable. How does it connect to the internet? 9600 baud? Just joking, I assume you're using a Powerbook or ibook.
Of course, Old world macs aren't firewire bootable either. But YDL is very fast on old world macs compared to OS X via Xpostfacto on old world hardware. (which is still good if not aged hardware) I'm currently running OS X on a G3 upgraded Powercomputing clone (thanks to Xpostfacto). at 420Mhz, it is slow compared to YDL on a Beige G3 266. So it is either OS 9 or YDL on old hardware. It is getting harder to get modern web browser features on OS 9.
I would agree that it is not a solution. I myself will not patronize the iTunes music store. I want to use an open standard and MP3 is one that I am happy with. and I do love my ipod
ok, now I understand that there is AAC, and AAC with fairplay (or should it be called fareplay? snicker snicker) AAC is by no means proprietary, but hardware player manufacturers would have to licence it. Fairplay is prorietary, but I understand that one can bypass it thru CD to MP3 or whatever other codec you want to use. Whether that is legal, is another issue. But I do belive you can put fairplay protected music on other players, you just have to work around it with tools that are available within OS X (i.e. burn a cd and re-encode, or convert to AIFF and re-encode) These tools may not be obvious, but I have seen on the net, people being able to do just that, without getting additional software. Of course it is an inconvience.
I was under the impression that AAC is not proprietary to apple. I thougt that they have licenced it, to provide some DRM in response to the RIAA. I do not believe that no one is stopping other hardware music players (MP3 players to be incorrect about the generic name) from adopting AAC other than licencing fees. Apple was pressured to provide DRM, and they decided on AAC which I believe others can use. So I don't think it is fair to criticize apple for thier choice of DRM for the itunes music store. and no, apple is not the new microsoft, as they do not have a monopoly, unless you consider that they do have a monopoly on cool computer hardware. I did do some googling before this post, but I use MP3 so I really haven't been following the music format choices. I don't use the iTunes music store. I do know that iTunes (not the store) does support other players when it comes to MP3 formats. And, since you can burn CD from AAC music in itunes, you can work around it to provide the music to other hardware players. (there are work arounds such that you don't actually have to burn a CD to convert it to MP3)
Wow, with so many countries producing nukes, I thinks the biggest threat is extra warheads being made with out the critical elements (the plutonium or enriched uranium) and these warhead "kits" getting loose. all it would take is plutonium made to critical dimensions, some HMX, maybe some RDX, and you have a nuke.
Now, I love hp calcs. But as the inventor of the "pocket" scientific calcualtors, they never stopped to make inexpensive RPN calcs, or solar powered calcs. (inexpensive being less that $20) Granted, an hp could last you the rest of your life, but you can't find some "N" cells for it at your local convience store. How come I never got the solar powered RPN calulator? I'd pay more than $20 for it. Could you make it with non-volitile memory? The hard core graphing calc is going away, replaced by computers and PDA's. Long live HP calculators.
Ok, look that was originally a Service/Deorbit module. Service. That might be a useful goal. We can develop autonamous docking, advance robotics, maybe make a "space tugboat" with it and service other satellites. But I think the bean counters, could counter that satellites should be made disposible and let's not waste our time and money on manned missions to service satellites. However, Hubble should be a historical monument. Maybe I should write a proposal on a study to bring down hubble using software routines that uses its solar panels, magnetic torquers, reaction wheels, gravity, and some atmospheric drag to bring it down in a somewhat predictible and safe manner maybe over a period of several hundred orbits... My point is, people bid on a lot of things...
It seems the cheapest way would be send a shuttle to nudge it during a mission whose orbit could be coordinated with hubble's orbit at one point during a mission that isn't specifically hubble related. They could use the arm and the shuttle's manuvering thrusters and significantly alter its orbit. I assume all future shuttle missions will be ISS and maybe DoD related, in order to conserve a "precious resource" that is the Shuttle's remaining flying schedule. I'm guessing that hubble's orbit is more elliptical than ISS and in a higher overall orbit. Therefore, it would be difficult to coordinate a mission? Since they can't get more that 2 people on ISS at once!!??? Man, my old man worked on apollo, skylab, hubble, ISS and problably a few more. Apollo was great in every sense of the word. when I was a kid, telling people your dad worked on hubble, with its misshapen mirror, you would be teased. ISS was a death of a thousand cuts, with poorly defined mission(s), I believe it was a very politcal project (ISS) that left science at #2 on the priorities list. (Apollo was political at its formation, but there was good science getting us to the moon (and maybe make our missiles hit their targets better in the process)). It is National Aeronautics and Space Administration isn't it? Kinda vague... Sounds ambitious... Administration
on Hubble there are reaction wheels and magnetic torquers. there are no thrusters. Hubble can manage its orbit with the reaction wheels and magnetic torquers which interact with the Earth's magnetic field. They cannot provide a large amount of force but like pushing a swing, a little push here and a little push there... Maybe use some atmospheric drag here and there... I would think that NASA would try to save money on hardware and try some orbital mechanics to bring it down without developing a "deorbit module" Kinda like Skylab. (ok Skylab had some thrusters, but it also had control moment gyros) I read the referenced article, no mention of a seperate "deorbit module" Some googling pointed to a proposed "deorbit module" that may cost up to $1bn. I think they will look long and hard at orbital mechanics to bring it down without the expense of a "deorbit module" but hey, I don't work for NASA. Hey, let's give lockmart some more tax money. Yes, I should talk to my father more!
the idea is to bring it down while they still have "robotic" control. There is no robot to send up to bring it down. They want to be able to command it down, in a nice target path, not some crapshoot deorbit when it goes bad and they can no longer control it due to gyroscope failure. BTW my father worked on pointing and control on Hubble. I'm no expert, but I've spent many nights asking him a lot of questions about Hubble.
yeah, my removable media is secure. I use magneto optical. Like I have ever seen anyone else use it.
security through obscurity.
More defense funded research. Fuck that. That is why I quit working for Auburn. Most of the research I was involved in was DoD funded. After the iraq war started I couldn't continue to do research funded by the DoD. A friend of mine did fuel cell research at Auburn. I hope he doesn't have any conflicts. There is nothing worse than seeing your work perverted into being used for an offensive war that was not needed. Fuck the DoD!!
I hope he is serving his master well in hell.
money (in the U.S.) has no intrinsic value. If Bush runs the country like the companies he has run, your money may be worthless. What happens if the gov't goes bankrupt? Can I get insurance insurance?? you know, in case my insurance company goes bankrupt.
I find the best thing to do with the 7200 series is to put them out on the street. Get a 7300,7500,7600, or an 8500 and trash the 7200.
The AP plant in Nevade did explode. With shock waves no less. They were still cranking out AP for NASA after the Challenger accident (due to contractual obligations). They had a huge stockpile. There is nothing wrong with putting water on magnesium powder as long as said magnesium powder isn't burning at the time you hose it down. If it is burning, don't put water on it.
are you kidding? The phone system could be used to copy music.
Very pure aluminum (3000 series I think) is used for storage tanks. The aluminum forms a self repairing oxide layer. Organics are a no-no around powerful oxidizers.
who are unencumbered by such subties. Americans are so sarcastic, dumbass!